The Political & Philosophy Thread

[Dak]

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...iggest-myth-about-the-gender-wage-gap/276367/

The Atlantic is a pretty left leaning moderate publication. I tried not to pull some obviously biased like, you know, Breitbart piece.

 

[EternalMetal]

In 2013 the median weekly income of full-time workers was $860 for men, compared to $706 for women. The female-to-male earnings ratio was 0.82, slightly higher than the 2010 ratio.[2] The female-to-male earnings ratio of 0.82 means that, in 2013, the average female FTYR worker earned 18% less than the average male FTYR worker. The statistic does not take into account differences in experience, skill, occupation, education or hours worked, as long as it qualifies as full-time work. Some portion of the wage gap is attributed by some to gender discrimination in the US[3]

http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_c...f-8232fe70a45c/compendium---sans-appendix.pdf

I love how they conclude that gender discrimination is a problem when there is no way you can draw any specific inferences from that data. What needs to be done is wage comparison on a smaller scale, maybe in a specific field, and try to correct for those glaring variables that they basically just seem to ignore. It seems like every study I read takes too many different types of jobs into account to get an extremely large sample size, because sample size is the only way to get reliable statistics, right?

Even the link Dak just posted, while better, still seems to cover "120 different jobs", which turns the data into just a less skewed pissing contest that shows that males win in the race of making more money.

The article goes on to say this:

PayScale's study is a necessary chaser to BLS and Census data, because the government "compares all weekly earnings, even though women and men do different things," said PayScale chief economist Katie Bardaro. "We're trying to compare men and women with the same education, same management responsibilities, similar employers, in companies with a similar number of employees." After controlling for these factors, "the gender wage gap disappears for most positions," she said.

Great, fine, but why didnt they post that data? The link to the PayScale study doesnt work for me, so I cant reference it for proof. This is what I expect to be the outcome, but why does it seem like nobody knows how to properly use statistics? That article is only half written, which is just as annoying as the article that Matt posted, which is misleading horseshit.

 

[End of Glory]

I'd tell your partner to make an official complaint about her income, the fact that she hasn't (has she?) is another factor creating income inequality in many workplaces. Many women won't speak up.

She has but nothing is happening. It's a common problem at my job and salaries are fucked up here. A women who've worked here for 15 years earns 21500/month and "we" recently hired a man at his 40's who has no experience in psychiatri what so ever but he earns 22000/month.

We're in no financial problem and we can spend money and do things we want to but more money is never wrong. I just got curious for this situation.

 

[CiG]

That is curious. It would be pretty funny if Sweden, arguably one of the most progressive, feminist nations on earth was sexist in that way.

 

[rms]

I mean, EU countries are more sexist than the U.S. in their hirings. If i'm not mistaken, they choose to not hire women in top tier positions because of all the benefits (or coverages) they get over men. Women are still stuck at the bottom rungs because they are literally more expensive employees.

 

[Dak]

Yeah I'll echo having read the same thing that rms said.

Women like to get easy degrees and and not push them or their careers to the next level, and for good reason: Doing so dramatically decreases your reproductive/happiness odds as a women. Whether or not that's """""right""""" is irrelevant within the context of a "wage gap" discussion. Psych is like the number two most popular undergraduate degreee right now iirc and it's a very easy undergraduate degree if you don't take the "I'm going to do grad school" path. So no senior thesis, minimal upper level classes etc. Even if you do take that route, it's still not Chemical engineering or something. And then what can you do with it? Be an HR rep? Go plunk down a bunch of extra money for a masters in social work or counseling and still make under 50k a year? And it's not like dudes are making Psych (and social studies) so popular. I stuck out like a sore thumb in my psych classes as a dude. Like 85/15 sex split.

 

[CiG]

I mean, EU countries are more sexist than the U.S. in their hirings. If i'm not mistaken, they choose to not hire women in top tier positions because of all the benefits (or coverages) they get over men. Women are still stuck at the bottom rungs because they are literally more expensive employees.

The irony.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

There are no conservatives in the US. Republicans are just shitty liberals.

So you're saying Ted Cruz(eg) is not a true conservative?

 

[viewerfromnihil]

No, he's everything terrible about Reagan wrapped in bacon.

 

[CiG]

Ted Cruz is about as close as you're going to get to a genuine conservative right now.

 

[Dak]

lol Cruz. What a fuck.

 

[CiG]

Well, who then if not Cruz?

 

[Dak]

Well, who then if not Cruz?

there are a handful of conservatives out there but they aren't even remotely a political force, nor do they have any potential representation in government.

tl;dr: No one.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Haha you don't know what you're talking about. Of course there are a handful of conservatives out there but they aren't even remotely a political force, nor do they have any potential representation in government.

Oh so Cruz isn't a political force? So which conservative would you say is?

Cruz is definitely a true conservative, anyone that questions that needs to leave the building.

No, he's everything terrible about Reagan wrapped in bacon.

I dont even now what this means, how exactly does that mean hes not a conservative? Doesn't even make any sense tbh.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

I dont even now what this means, how exactly does that mean hes not a conservative? Doesn't even make any sense tbh.

He's a neo-con. Neo-cons may have taken over the American right, but that doesn't make them conservatives.

 

[rms]

what are the qualities of a true conservative

 

[Dak]

Cruz is the human equivalent of a zit that is so ripe it'll pop itself at any moment.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

He's a neo-con. Neo-cons may have taken over the American right, but that doesn't make them conservatives.

So what you're saying is that Reagan was part neo-con?

Funny coming form someone who supports a hijacked party. The only side that has been "taken over" is the left, so badly that they shouldn't even use the word "democrat" anymore.

 

[Dak]

I can't figure out what was supposed to be conservative about Reagan. Maybe you could enlighten the thread.

 

[rms]

Christianity Christianity Christianity Christianity Christianity